Movie Review: Waterworld (1995)

Synopsis: By the year 2500, the sea has risen to cover all of Earth's continents, creating a society of primitive floating communities dependent on trade and always under threat of being attacked by "Smokers," a group of pirates on gas-powered vehicles. While stopping at one of these communities, a lone mariner saves a woman and child from the Smokers and finds himself stalked by the pirates because the child is rumored to have a map to dry land tattooed on her back.

Who's in it? The movie stars Kevin Costner, Dennis Hopper, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Tina Majorino and Gerard Murphy.

Review: It had been quite a few years since I had last seen Waterworld in its entirety and while I know it was a box office bomb that has received a lot of criticism, I honestly didn't remember it being all that bad. That's why I decided to watch it again when I came across it on one of our movie channels. 

After seeing it again, my opinion about it has changed.

The movie's overall premise isn't a bad one. It reminded me a bit of Mad Max with maybe a mixture of Planet of the Apes (minus the apes) because it was about a society that had all but forgotten people had ever lived on land and was essentially ruled by ruthless outlaws. The idea a child could change that by leading them to a mythical promised land was intriguing.

Plus, I am going to say I liked Dennis Hopper in his role as the main antagonist, Deacon. I thought he was an intriguing character, ruthless but not overly intelligent and able to tell convincing lies when needed. In most movies, he would be a memorable addition.

The main problem with this film is the overall execution. It clearly had a big budget (which is a big part of the reason it failed to make the money back) but I don't know if that budget was used in the right ways. Let's face it, if most of the movie takes place on the water with very little scenery and only three main characters talking to each other, it's going to get boring. Plus, it felt like there were aspects of the water society that didn't quite add up. For example, it was great product placement with Spam, but I find it hard to believe even that would still be around and/or edible decades after people stopped making it. Not to mention the whole crush depth thing being ignored when it came to diving to the ocean's bottom.

Another thing that hurt this movie, in my opinion, was the Mariner (Costner) wasn't very likable or interesting. He spends most of the movie being an ass and sort of makes up for it later but compared to Deacon, was kind of dull personality wise. In other words, it was hard to root for him.

In fact, the movie might have actually been better had it just been Helen (Tripplehorn) trying to protect Enola (Majorino) on her own. Helen was a much more interesting character but because Costner was the star, was largely reduced to a love interest role (and to take her clothes off in one scene). A strong-willed woman with limited means taking on a group of well-armed pirates could have made the movie a lot more enjoyable.

Final Opinion: I still think the movie is at least a little better than people give it credit for, in no small part due to Hopper's performance. However, after re-watching it, I can understand why it's considered a flop.

My Grade: C